Philosophy Now Forum

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Apr 03, 2022 1:31 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Apr 02, 2022 11:43 pm
'you', "walker", have NOT SHOWN and PROVEN that 'you' even KNOW what a 'woman' IS, YET.

Why don't you stop talking to random strangers on the internet as if they have been born without a brain, I'm fairly certain people know what a woman is...stop being such a weird ass freak.

How quick 'you' FORGET "dontaskme".

Anyway, ALL of 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this was being written, BELIEVED that 'you' KNEW what a 'woman' WAS, EXACTLY. However, as ALREADY PROVED True NONE of 'you' were even ABLE to define what a 'woman' WAS, EXACTLY.

Also, let us NOT forget that it was "walker" who CLAIMED that the adult person in question does NOT know what a woman is.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Apr 04, 2022 1:10 am Anyway, ALL of 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this was being written, BELIEVED that 'you' KNEW what a 'woman' WAS, EXACTLY. However, as ALREADY PROVED True NONE of 'you' were even ABLE to define what a 'woman' WAS, EXACTLY.

Also, let us NOT forget that it was "walker" who CLAIMED that the adult person in question does NOT know what a woman is.

Those are incorrect statements, as the written record proves.

*

Age, as it will enrich your life in future situations, begin now to stay focused.
Relax, because the best comes from being relaxed.
Allow me to help.

Due to your inability to grasp the point, the point can be refined into simpler terms, and this is a good thing. This is how principles are revealed within dialogue.

- Only the role of professional judge is being assessed. Therefore, in principle, should a professional judge be able to say what a woman is?

If your answer is yes, explain why.
If your answer is no, explain why.

Everything else you’re doing is just noise, Age. It's just noise, like a quacking duck.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Apr 04, 2022 11:33 am

Age wrote: ↑Mon Apr 04, 2022 1:10 am Anyway, ALL of 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this was being written, BELIEVED that 'you' KNEW what a 'woman' WAS, EXACTLY. However, as ALREADY PROVED True NONE of 'you' were even ABLE to define what a 'woman' WAS, EXACTLY.

Also, let us NOT forget that it was "walker" who CLAIMED that the adult person in question does NOT know what a woman is.

Those are incorrect statements, as the written record proves.

*

Age, as it will enrich your life in future situations, begin now to stay focused.
Relax, because the best comes from being relaxed.
Allow me to help.

Due to your inability to grasp the point, the point can be refined into simpler terms, and this is a good thing. This is how principles are revealed within dialogue.

- Only the role of professional judge is being assessed. Therefore, in principle, should a professional judge be able to say what a woman is?

If your answer is yes, explain why.
If your answer is no, explain why.

Everything else you’re doing is just noise, Age. It's just noise, like a quacking duck.

Now that you have CHANGED YOUR QUESTION, and thus have DEFLECTED from the POINT I WAS MSKING, then 'things' have, obviously, CHANGED here.

But if ANY one wants to GO BACK and DISCUSS the POINT I WAS MAKING, then all well and good. I am more than willing to.

By the way I do NOT say what 'you', adult human beings, SHOULD nor SHOULD NOT be doing. 'you' are old enough to KNOW ALREADY.

Note to The Ages:
Persistence such as yours is a gift.
If it could be bottled and properly applied, the dole would be dead.

In both her identity and her societal role as a Supreme objective judge, the medical definition of what a woman is, suffices for the nominee. The medical definition of when a woman’s life begins, also suffices, should some senator dare to ask. *

It's rather a moot point for the probable outcome, though. The Democrats rarely break ranks **, and as I recall, three RINO's have already signaled that she, meaning the nominee, is A-OK in their book.




* Shirley, you must know the Progressive way to get-around that little detail.
** Call it, the power of Pelosi.

https://youtu.be/dXPe1B6nY_8

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nydail ... utType=amp

promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 13, 2022 5:29 pm 6cgfw3.jpg

https://youtu.be/dXPe1B6nY_8

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nydail ... utType=amp

He can't take it? Looks like a personal drama, 'cause the media isn't interested. (They say he listened to CNN.)

"Russian warship, go fuck yourself" - Roman Hrybov

"You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them." - Ray Bradbury

-Imp

Impenitent wrote: ↑Sat May 07, 2022 1:23 am "You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them." - Ray Bradbury

-Imp

No one ever wrote what every one reads.

"If you can't trust anything, take the piss out of everything. "

- attofishpi

Yuval Noah Harari

A new branch of mathematics was developed over the last 200 years to deal with the more complex aspects of reality: statistics.

Cue Disraeli: "There are three types of lies -- lies, damn lies, and statistics.”

In the nineteenth century the Industrial Revolution created new conditions and problems that none of the existing social, economic, and political models could cope with. Feudalism, monarchism, and traditional religions were not adapted to managing industrial metropolises, millions of uprooted workers, or the constantly changing nature of the modern economy. Consequently, humankind had to develop completely new models—liberal democracies, communist dictatorships, and fascist regimes—and it took more than a century of terrible wars and revolutions to experiment with these models, separate the wheat from the chaff, and implement the best solutions. Child labor in Dickensian coal mines, the First World War, and the Great Ukrainian Famine of 1932–33 constituted just a small part of the tuition fees humankind had to pay.

History let's call it.

As of 2016, humankind indeed manages to hold the stick at both ends. Not only do we possess far more power than ever before, but against all expectations, God’s death did not lead to social collapse. Throughout history prophets and philosophers have argued that if humans stopped believing in a great cosmic plan, all law and order would vanish. Yet today, those who pose the greatest threat to global law and order are precisely those people who continue to believe in God and His all-encompassing plans. God-fearing Syria is a far more violent place than the atheist Netherlands.

Make of this what you will of course.

The greatest scientific discovery was the discovery of ignorance. Once humans realised how little they knew about the world, they suddenly had a very good reason to seek new knowledge, which opened up the scientific road to progress.

Some humans anyway. For the rest there's pop culture, mindless consumption and reality TV.

True, hundreds of millions may nevertheless go on believing in Islam, Christianity or Hinduism. But numbers alone don’t count for much in history. History is often shaped by small groups of forward-looking innovators rather than by the backward-looking masses.

A small group of us here thank god.

The governmental tortoise cannot keep up with the technological hare.

That's what Wall Street is for.

https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=400

Emile M. Cioran

Our place is somewhere between being and nonbeing - between two fictions.

Not all that different from their place.

Think of God and not religion, of ecstasy and not mysticism. The difference between the theoretician of faith and the believer is as great as between the psychiatrist and the psychotic.

And certainly between you and I.

Skepticism is the elegance of anxiety.

If not downright dread eventually.

We interest others by the misfortune we spread around us.

Hell, that practically makes me a star here.

To want fame is to prefer dying scorned than forgotten.

If only for 15 minutes.

To devastate by language, to blow up the word and with it the world.

The ultimate fantasy as it were.